On 6 Feb 2007, at 21:50:28, Tim Palac wrote:
I've upgraded all the videos on my site to Flash, and there is code
(Flash
Satay, amongst others) that works with all browsers and still
follows all
standards.
snip
This is the code I use to embed Flash on my site that doesn't give
the W3C
The fact that *some* users get a poor experience with Quicktime
content is exactly why Sarah should go with Flash.
Absolutely. I advised that earlier in this thread.
--
Jan Brasna :: www.alphanumeric.cz | www.janbrasna.com | www.wdnews.net
I've upgraded all the videos on my site to Flash, and there is code (Flash
Satay, amongst others) that works with all browsers and still follows all
standards. Trust me, this is the way you want to go - my experience with
Quicktime is that the files tend to be bulky, and there's no way they have
Many thanks Tim.
I've upgraded all the videos on my site to Flash, and there is code
(Flash
Satay, amongst others) that works with all browsers and still follows
all
standards. Trust me, this is the way you want to go - my experience
with
Quicktime is that the files tend to be bulky,
Quicktime is that the files tend to be bulky, and
there's no way they have the quality that a Flash video file will.
That's not precisely true, the Sorenson and H.24(4|3) are pretty much
similar in effectiveness to VP6 (and some of the codecs are even shared
among these containers). All
On 2/6/07, Jan Brasna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quicktime is that the files tend to be bulky, and
there's no way they have the quality that a Flash video file will.
That's not precisely true, the Sorenson and H.24(4|3) are pretty much
similar in effectiveness to VP6 (and some of the codecs are
On 2/6/07, Sarah Peeke (XERT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. Is there a different file format which is more universal?
Quicktime movies can be imported into Flash, which has much higher
browser penetration. And there is lots of information available on
embedding flash in a gracefully degradable
1. What is the best way to hide the movie from browsers that don't
support quicktime (or from users who don't want to download quicktime)?
To use an UFO/SWFObject alternative for QT, or Satay-like QT alternative
w/ fallbacks.
2. Is there a different file format which is more universal?
Accessibility
www.testpartners.co.uk
www.accessibility.co.uk
-Original Message-
From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Jan Brasna
Sent: 05 February 2007 23:47
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Usability Questions for Quicktime
1. What
Hi Steve
We work for a lot of clever people and they often
revert to a non-Flash solution.
Thanks for your reply (and everyone else too!) - I was concerned about
Flash too.
Have the designers you've tested for found QuickTime to be more
accessible to screen readers, generally?
Otherwise,
QuickTime to be more accessible to screen readers, generally?
It's generally the same - no one advised you to autostart the playback
etc., so as long as the Flash could receive focus and start the playback
via AT, it's okay.
I am most concerned about usability/accessibility issues with
On 2/5/07, Sarah Peeke (XERT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. Is there a different file format which is more universal?
Quicktime works well with IE browsers, but with other browsers it's
hit and miss. All too often I have seen my browser (FF 2.0) crash as a
result of a Quicktime movie. Flash
On 06/02/07, Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quicktime works well with IE browsers, but with other browsers it's
hit and miss. All too often I have seen my browser (FF 2.0) crash as a
result of a Quicktime movie. Flash never crashes. Regardless of which
consumes more resources (and if
13 matches
Mail list logo
